The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Prevalence of Combined Fecal and Urinary Incontinence: A Community‐Based Study
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence of combined fecal and urinary incontinence. DESIGN: A cross‐sectional, community‐based study. SETTING: Olmsted County, Minnesota. PARTICIPANTS: Men (n = 778) and women (n = 762), aged 50 years or older, selected randomly from the population. MEASUREMENTS: Participants completed a previously validated self‐administered questionnaire that assessed the occurrence of fecal and urinary incontinence in the previous year. RESULTS: The age‐adjusted prevalence of incontinence was 11.1% (95% Confidence Interval (CI), 8.8–13.5) in men and 15.2% (95% CI, 12.5–17.9) in women for fecal incontinence; 25.6% (95% CI, 22.5–28.8) in men and 48.4% (95% CI, 44.7–52.2) in women for urinary incontinence; and 5.9% (95% CI, 4.1–7.6) in men and 9.4% (95% CI, 7.1–11.6) in women for combined urinary and fecal incontinence. The prevalence of fecal incontinence increased with age in men but not in women, from 8.4% among men in their fifties to 18.2% among men in their eighties ( P for trend =. 001). For women, the prevalence increased from 13.1% among 50‐ year‐old women to 20.7% among women 80 years or older (P for trend =. 5). Among persons with fecal incontinence, the prevalence of concurrent urinary incontinence was 51.1% among men and 59.6% among women (P =. 001 and P =. 003, respectively). Cross‐sectionally, the age‐adjusted, relative odds of fecal incontinence among persons with urinary incontinence was greater in men than in women (Odds Ratio (OR) = 3.0; 95% CI, 1.9–4.8 in men and OR = 1.8; 95% CI, 1.2–2.7 in women, P =. 04). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that persons with one form of incontinence are likely to have the other form as well. Despite the higher prevalence of urinary and fecal incontinence among women, the association between fecal incontinence and urinary incontinence was stronger among men than women. This finding, and the significant association between fecal incontinence and age observed in men but not in women, suggest that the etiologies may be more closely linked in men than in women.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
History of the Rochester Epidemiology Project
Melton, L. J. (1996) · Mayo Clinic Proceedings · doi:10.4065/71.3.266 · Cited by 1,443
Cited by
Epidemiology of prolapse and incontinence questionnaire: validation of a new epidemiologic survey.
Lukacz, E. S., Lawrence, J. M., Buckwalter, J. G., Burchette, R. J., Nager, C. W., & Luber, K. M. (2005) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-005-1314-5 · Cited by 131
Fecal incontinence in the elderly patient
Tariq, S. H., Morley, J. E., & Prather, C. M. (2003) · The American Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0002-9343(03)00327-9 · Cited by 49
Metadata
- Authors
- Roberts, R. O., Jacobsen, S. J., Reilly, W. T., Pemberton, J. H., Lieber, M. M., & Talley, N. J.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1999-07
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 837-841
- ISSN
- 0002-8614 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-5415
- OpenAlex
- W1988148657
- Cited by
- 244
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 3.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prevalence of Combined Fecal and Urinary Incontinence: A Community‐Based Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1532-5415.1999.tb03841.x
- The paper
- Roberts, R. O., Jacobsen, S. J., Reilly, W. T., Pemberton, J. H., Lieber, M. M., & Talley, N. J. (1999). Prevalence of Combined Fecal and Urinary Incontinence: A Community‐Based Study. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.1999.tb03841.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.